It appears that the Senator from New York will take a few minutes off from her normal routine of collecting illegal campaign contributions to grace us with another chapter in the ongoing saga of Hillarycare. Here’s how one of her minions described it to the AP:
It puts the consumer in the driver’s seat by offering more choices and lowering costs,” Neera Tanden, Clinton’s top policy adviser, told The Associated Press.
And how does Her Majesty plan to “put the consumer in driver’s seat”? She will issue a royal decree mandating that all her subjects buy coverage:
The centerpiece of Clinton’s plan is the so-called “individual mandate,” requiring everyone to have health insurance.
That’s right. In the Orwellian world of Hillarycare, “more choices” means a law requiring you to buy insurance, whether you want it or not. And it’s not just individuals who will be subjected Hillary’s version of “choice”:
Businesses … would be required to offer insurance to employees, or contribute to a government-run pool that would help pay for those not covered.
I can’t decide which is creepier: the overweening statism of Hillary’s vision or the doublespeak she and her lackeys use to describe it. If these people don’t give you the willies (sorry about that), you’re not paying attention.
Comments 11
So, I’m not the only one who thinks this is turning out to be the largest corporate welfare ever proposed? I haven’t seen a single politician propose anything that addresses the fundamental problems like spiraling costs and procedures being dictated by law and liability rather than patient health. Basically, the politicians are giving us more of the same, its just going to cost a lot more this time.
Posted 17 Sep 2007 at 9:37 am ¶Giuliani has come about as close as any of the serious candidates.
Posted 17 Sep 2007 at 2:38 pm ¶Mr. Catron: I’ve been reading HCBS for three months and find it engaging and sometimes amusing. With Mrs. Clinton’s announcement, I’ve moved-up the launch of my online site –
http://www.healthcaremoney.info
which includes my comments on her (new) plan –
” .. Today, there is little in Mrs. Clinton’s new “universal health care” proposal that would ensure quality universal health care. If enacted, it would most likely just create more unresponsive bureaucracy to make health care more complex, costly, and problematic. Her husband once promised the “end of big government:” her plan appears to be trying to bring some of “big government” back ..”
in toto at –
http://healthcaremoney-newsblog.blogspot.com/2007/09/analysis-opinion.html
Best to the Dawgs,
Posted 17 Sep 2007 at 7:03 pm ¶/s/ C.A. Chien
Clearly, none of you have ever become very sick, or badly hurt, and found your insurance tested. I have. My “all-private-all-the-time” point of view(because I was SO sure I was well insured) turned 180 degrees when it cost me more than $7000 out of pocket for a MISdiagnosis.
At least Hillary is suggesting something that might actually work. Most of the rest of the candidates wouldn’t know a workable solution if it hit them between the eyes.
Learn more: EveryPatientsAdvocate.com/blog
Posted 17 Sep 2007 at 9:36 pm ¶At least Hillary is suggesting something that might actually work.
The tragedy, Trisha, is that her plan will not work. It will decrease access, increase cost, and give the government unprecedented power over our daily lives.
Posted 17 Sep 2007 at 9:59 pm ¶Madam, the facts:
” .. found your insurance tested ..”
With a 1000 respects — as pointed out on my Web site, 35% of Americans want health care re-engineered, highest % in the West. Everyone knows there are big problems and are working intensely to solve them — Michael Moore is not a “prophet” (except for the $20+ MM he’s made in mock-u-mentaries).
” .. At least Hillary is suggesting something that might actually work ..”
Possibly, in theory. Could also start a legal war that would take 25 years to settle.
I’m not willing to take that risk, with someone who has no executive experience and enjoys harassing her enemies. She is the kind of politician who gets the silent majority off their couches and into the streets. (Hmm .. yes, she should be the Democratic nominee, for obviously reasons.)
Posted 19 Sep 2007 at 9:24 am ¶” .. it cost me more than $7000 out of pocket for a MISdiagnosis.”
BTW: billing errors are very common. If that happened to me, I would review the bill with a fine-tooth comb, several times. I’ve seen $5,000 surgery charges attributed to the wrong patient by a $25K/year clerk.
About mis-diagnosis: that is also very common. Medicine is as much about art of logic as science. FYI: GWB, to his credit, has been very firm about MDs NOT getting paid for errors that result in serious injury.
Again — if it were me, I’d pretend I was an insurance company and demand a big discount, like 65%.
Posted 19 Sep 2007 at 9:35 am ¶Hmmm I wonder? How many here knows how it is to be born dirt poor to have nothing. To have to quit school. Just so you can work full time. Just to have utilities. Then wounder, if I pay this bill can I still eat? I have been there. I know how it feels. I have worked hard all my life. Just to get what I have now. And BY GOD it hurts to look at my kids. And tell them they cant have seconds cause we are out of food till I get paid. To make sure they eat their lunch at school. So they wont be to hungry.
Posted 22 Oct 2007 at 1:19 pm ¶Me and my wife both work. We gross just a little to much to get tenn-care on the kids, so no one in my home has insurance. Now my job which I have to drive to another state just to draw a check large enough to pay some of the bills and eat does offer insurance thats to high.
I cant pay for it and pay my house payment. There is no way. And as health care goes, my doctor has told me I need another MRI to see what it causing the major pain in my kidney and to see where all the blood is comming from.
That was last year. I still have not had an MRI Cause I know like last time, they will sue me. And my kids will suffer even more on the things they need. And after all that, Im called the lower-middle class. I know you will ask why should I have to pay for you? I say I hope you will never have too. But who will pay in the end. If something happens to me? Then the gov will have to provide a home, food, insurance, and an education to 4 more kids and my wife.
Who do you think is going to have to pay for that? Not me I will be dead. So which will cost more? UV health care that I can help to pay for too. Or welfair That you will have to pay for. And just think with UV health care. How much money will be saved? All the other programs That give health care for free will be gone so all that tax money I hope can go to this, To lower the price more. There are ways to make it cheaper. And I keep hearing about lines where people have to wait for care. Has anyone been to the ER? You will wait hours. My little girl had to wait 3 days to get her finger put back on. 3 days with it wraped up hanging by a peice of meat. Lots of blood to get told that up to a week is normal. Cause kids heal faster, that her finger should not die. So what I want is simple. Take a fair amount out of my wifes check, my check, Let my family go to the doctor. And not worry about the bill. (Or the way it works. Bills even if you see only one doctor) and not to get sued cause it was way to much. And dont even say doctors will work with you. Thats a funny one. (we need at least this amount to stop the lawsuit) funny that amount is still more than I got. I have even been told. That the reason it cost so much is cause I have no health insurance. So UV health care. I ask how much? When will I get it? When will my family/I be covered? I will be happy to help pay for UV care. Unlike welfair which every ones taxes already pay for. Just a little insight in the life of a citizen.
As much as I’d like to see a woman president, I don’t trust Hillary as far as I can throw her.
Posted 19 Nov 2007 at 11:45 pm ¶it is always interesting to find an Obama site where the lack of knowledge of a given topic equals Obama and his advisors lack of knowledge on the topic.
Mandates work to get more folks in the system - read the US and international literature sometime on this topic. Likewise while single payer is the way to go, we get there more easily via Edwards/Hillary medicare option approach with mandate - than we will get there with Obama’s no mandate. Read the Connector as to the success of the Mass Plan in getting folks both coverage and value for the dollar. Why you push the most conservative choice of Edwards/Hillary/Obama - and the choice with the least history of getting anything pf substance through our Congress (he has no bills to his credit)- is beyond my understanding - but different tastes for different folks so no problem - and he does speak even if the “change” and “hope” never have specifics about what is about to change and what we should be hoping for. But then con men long ago learned the con was more effective if you let the sucker fill in the blanks with what they want - rather than being specific about something where you can get caught up with contrary facts. It seems it is only on mandates that the insurance companies have paid Obama enough for him to get specific and guarantee that there will be no universal health insurance - just “choices” with rules that he will forget about once elected.
Posted 06 Jan 2008 at 3:56 pm ¶you don’t have a right to have kids and you don’t have a right for others to be taxed to paid for your children…i’m sorry, but this is just fact…
Hillary says that it is the Democrats moral responsibility to provide health care to all Americans…I heard a better representation of her plan this morning on Washington Journal…
What is really behind her plan is that there are Americans that won’t want health care because they don’t see it as cost effective for them…in other words, they are a “good gamble” for the heath care companies because they will won’t cost as much to keep healthy, and so they want them to have to buy into the system…
that is why she mandates that EVERYONE buy into the system in some sort of fashion, even if you don’t want the health care…
she knows that the health care companies won’t play ball unless everyone is in the system so that they can maximize on profits…
Posted 01 Feb 2008 at 10:54 pm ¶Post a Comment